Partnerships

I would imagine, without checking on the actual lecture, that I quoted the definition of a partnership as ‘the relationship that exists between two or more people carrying on a business in common with a view to profit’ and (hopefully) I also quoted the definition of a joint venture as being ‘a partnership for a particular adventure, venture, course of trade or voyage’

Certainly when I was recording the lectures for the Financial Accounts paper, now replaced by the wonderful lectures by Chris, I would have defined a joint venture as above

If a joint venture is created for a single event, say the attendance at a sales conference, then it necessarily follows that it’s possible to have a partnership for that one-off adventure and thus, by definition, it is available to have a joint venture / partnership for a single purpose

Is that OK?

Hi Charlotte

Sadly, there’s no such thing these days as an F4 exam 🙁

In fact, there are no F exams at all nowadays! What used to be the F4 exam has been replaced by the ACCA’s Law exam.

As for new lecture notes … within the lectures I quote The Earl of Oxford’s Case. That’s from 1610 (give or take a couple of years) and there are numerous examples of 18th and 19th century cases that I refer to in my lectures. The point I’m making is that the law syllabus changes rarely and, even then, only minimally

So please rest assured that the lectures on this site are fully up-to-date and relevant for students taking the ACCA’s Law Exam

And thank you so much for your lovely comment about my lectures! That’s the nicest comment I’ve received this year 🙂

Let me know if you come across any issues that require clarification